Legal Opinion

Murray v. Mastroeni

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 7, 1930PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRodenbeck, J.

The defendant Mastroeni should not be allowed to try out in this action his right to recover from his codefendant, Porter, any judgment which may be awarded the plaintiff against Mastroeni individually or jointly with bis codefendant. Under his defense he will have every opportunity to show that Porter is solely responsible for the accident, but that is as far as he ought to be permitted "to go.

Defendant Porter’s defense of the plaintiff’s claim should not be embarrassed by an affirmative claim made against him by his _ codefendant for- any separate or joint judgment that may be; recovered.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stern v. George P. Ide & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  2. Neuss, Hesslein & Co. v. National Aniline & Chemical Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1923

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bigelow v. DuBuqueNew York Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Feuer v. FentonCity of New York Municipal Court · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API